# Dental Implant Outcomes in Patients with Cleft Lip, Alveolus and/or Palate: A Systematic Analysis of Clinical Studies

## TL;DR

This study shows dental implants in grafted cleft sites have improved survival over time, with modern techniques achieving higher success rates.

## Contribution

The study provides a systematic analysis of temporal trends in dental implant survival in cleft patients, revealing a statistically significant improvement over time.

## Key findings

- Modern dental implant survival in grafted cleft sites is 94.2%, significantly higher than the 91.2% in earlier studies.
- Implant failures mainly occurred during early osseointegration due to graft volume or stability issues.
- Late biological complications were rare, suggesting improved long-term outcomes with modern protocols.

## Abstract

Background and Objectives: Dental implant placement in grafted alveolar cleft sites has become an integral component of comprehensive cleft rehabilitation. However, survival outcomes vary across studies, and temporal trends in clinical performance have not been systematically quantified. This review aimed to evaluate implant survival in grafted alveolar cleft patients and to compare outcomes between early and modern treatment eras. Materials and Methods: A systematic search of the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Wiley databases was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Clinical studies reporting implant survival in grafted alveolar cleft sites with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. Data extraction encompassed implant survival, timing of placement, grafting protocols, and reported causes of failure. For temporal comparison, studies were stratified into an early era (1997–2008) and a modern era (2010–2026). Weighted pooled survival rates were calculated, and differences between proportions were assessed using a two-proportion Z-test (p < 0.05). Results: 18 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 1561 implants placed in grafted alveolar cleft sites. Overall reported survival ranged from 80% to 100%. Weighted pooled survival increased from 91.2% (95% CI: 87.9–94.5) in early studies to 94.2% (95% CI: 92.9–95.5) in modern cohorts, demonstrating a statistically significant 3.0% absolute improvement (p = 0.038). Implant failures occurred predominantly during the early osseointegration phase and were commonly associated with insufficient graft volume or inadequate primary stability. Late biological complications were infrequently reported. Conclusions: When appropriate bone reconstruction, healing, and multidisciplinary coordination are achieved, implant therapy represents a reliable component of comprehensive cleft care. Further prospective studies with standardized protocols and long-term follow-up are needed to strengthen evidence-based recommendations.